Re: [PATCH 2/2] Move sequencer to builtin

Jeff King wrote:

I actually think word choice and politeness is only a small part of it,
and one that I live without.  It is not just _how_ something is said,
but _what_ is said. And sometimes what is said does not lead in a
productive direction. I found Thomas's comment here:

  http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/227053

sums up the core of many of the conflicts I've seen on the list.

This is all very good, Jeff.  Various people have expressed what's
wrong with fc's "demeanour", "tone", and "style of discussion" in
various different ways at various different points in time.  This goes
on and on and on with no end in sight. WHAT do we do?

I'll be frank: I'm a pragmatic person, and I want to see work.
Despite all this mess, who has shown me the most number of patches
with some direction?  Felipe.  Who gets the most number of patches
into git.git, by far?  Felipe.  And who is wasting time theorizing
about what's wrong with Felipe in various ways?  Everyone else.

I am less interested in people's feelings than I am in discussions
trying to reach a productive position of agreement, rather than turning
it into a point by point debate that may no longer have any use for the
project (sometimes individual points need to be refuted or discussed, of
course, but it is easy to lose sight of the purpose of an email).

Felipe has discussed the {sequencer.c -> builtin/sequencer.c} move
with a bunch of us (and sent a patch), discussed how to write tests
properly with me (with a patch), and discussed how ruby can be used to
call into libgit.a (with code that I'm currently playing with).